provide policy makers the intelligence

provide policy makers the intelligence

Ponder as the topic for this week’s forum posting. Please select just one Question and do a thorough job on it.

Questions to Ponder

What are some of the situations or occurrence that should lead me to suspect that Denial and Deception are being employed against me?
When should evidence of Denial and Deception be sought?
Is it possible to be completely certain of action before it occurs?
What are the “cry wolf syndrome” and the “paradox of warning”, and how do they play into the defense against, and the detection of Denial and Deception?
What are the steps in the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses, and how is this analysis conducted?

Instructions: Your initial post should be at least 250-500 words in length (not including references listed at the end). Please respond to at least 2 other students and one follow up question. Responses should be a minimum of 150 words in length and include references to the material.

Reading & Resources:

Heuer, Richards J. Jr. 1999. Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence Ch. 2, Ch. 4-8, scan remainder.

Joint Publication 3-13.4. 2006. “Military Deception.” Accessed March 12, 2014. Exec Summary, Ch. 2 and Ch. 5

Student Response #1 – Harshul

What are the “cry wolf syndrome” and the “paradox of warning”, and how do they play into the defense against, and the detection of Denial and Deception?

The “cry wolf syndrome” is a “…false alert, and particularly a series of them, breeds skepticism or downright disbelief of the authentic warning when it is in fact received” (Grabo 2007, 82). The role it plays into the defense against and the detection of Denial and Deception is by and large negative. The lesson from Aesop’s tale of the boy who cried wolf is applicable here as well, but with potentially dangerous consequences. By “crying wolf” too many times in regards to terrorism or foreign intelligence organizations one can contribute to diminishing the overall sense of urgency of the team. Furthermore by sullying ones own credibility, when a real threats emerges the warning is likely to receive less attention and can result in a security breach or an attack.

The “paradox of warning” is defined as “enemy counteraction based on action taken as a result of a warning that alters the enemy’s initially intended course of action. The warning thus appears to be wrong on the basis of the change in enemy action” (Physics 911 2014, np). The role this plays into the defense against and the detection of Denial and Deception can also be negative. The one aspect that confirms its counterproductive nature within this cycle of action and reaction among forces is preemptive activity by ones own forces or friendly forces. By reacting to mere indications or even conclusive evidence of the adversaries intentions, the enemy is allowed an opportunity to reassess and alter his strategy.


  1. Grabo, Cythia, M. 2007. Strategic Warning: The problem of Timing. (accessed October 24, 2014)
  2. Physics 911. 2014. Scientific Panel Investigating the Events of September 11, 2001. (accessed October 24, 2014)

Student Response #2 – Bobby

What are some of the situations or occurrence that should lead me to suspect that Denial and Deception are being employed against me?

According to Psychology of Intelligence Analysis, suggests that analyst often reject the possibility of deception because they see no evidence of it (Heuer 1999, 98). If deception is done correctly, it will go virtually undetected and could show the false of what the enemy is trying to accomplish. In order to prevent the denial and deception Heuer explains the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) is a tool for an analyst to use so they do not get complacent. It provides an 8-step process that requires careful weighing of alternate explanations or conclusions. The analyst must use a weighted system against each hypothesis that can reduce the amount of misleading information that can be a denial and deception campaign started from the enemy.

So now that a basic understanding of ACH can help analyst offset their chance of a denial and deception campaign, considerations needs to be given to the enemy’s capabilities. The analyst must have a deep knowledge and understanding of not only the capabilities but also how they typically employ them. One thing that needs to be done is complete removal of all biases associated to the situation because it can have grave consequences if an analyst has a stake in it. What I mean by this is, when an analyst feels like it is his entire baby and that he has been working on the problem for so long, that he is not open to other ideas.

Another way that may prevent our adversary from utilizing D&D would be putting together a red cell analysis on the country in question. This would provide the best analysis of the enemies capabilities as well as providing subject matter experts looking at the way the enemy would fight against us. If done correctly, would provide an understanding and modeling of an enemy that would improve analysis.

One way to that should help in determining you are suspect to D&D is by applying critical thinking to the situation. Employment of critical thinking in the process can mitigate the effects of a person’s mindset and biases by utilizing skillful analysis of evidence for and against an issue according to Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis (Moore 2007, 50). Understanding the intelligence coming in and questioning the information is essential because sources can be unreliable, D&D efforts can distort information, and this can create uncertainty. Using authenticity, accuracy, and reliability can help in establishing a common baseline of evidence that can be used in the analysis. The analyst should always consider, are you being deceived and then identify ways to provide alternate viewpoints to minimize the risk.

An analyst can employ numerous techniques, if they suspect a D&D campaign employed against them. The main area of concern is for the analyst to identify it and always be asking themselves are you being deceived. In today’s technologically advanced world, a multi-intelligence approach to a problem will be best utilized. If done correctly, it could help in reducing the chances of having a D&D campaign against you and will provide policy makers the intelligence needed for them to form policies.


Heuer, Richards J. Jr. Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Washington: Center for the Study of Intelligence, 1999.

Moore, David T. Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis. Washington: National Defense Intelligence College, 2007.

OSINT – week 6

For this forum, you are to answer one of the questions listed below. The original post must be a minimum of 250 words. Additionally, you must post two (2) peer reviews on a classmate’s original post. Please be courteous and succinct in your response. The goal is to extend the conversation through your observations and experience.


The post provide policy makers the intelligence appeared first on best homeworkhelp.

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"